What is the test for determining whether the prosecution has proved beyond a reasonable doubt that an instructional error contributed to a jury's finding that a section 12022.53(b) enhancement was harmless?

but "whether the prosecution has 'prove[d] beyond a reasonable doubt that the error . . . did not contribute' to the jury's verdict." (People v. Sengpadychith, supra, 26 Cal.4th at p. 320.) On this record, we cannot conclude that the evidence supporting the enhancement was so overwhelming as to render the instructional error harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. Accordingly, the jury's true finding on the section 12022.53(b) enhancement allegation and the corresponding 10-year term imposed on that enhancement must be vacated.⁶